↓ Skip to main content

Reasons for and factors associated with issuing sickness certificates for longer periods than necessary: results from a nationwide survey of physicians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reasons for and factors associated with issuing sickness certificates for longer periods than necessary: results from a nationwide survey of physicians
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-478
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Bränström, Britt Arrelöv, Catharina Gustavsson, Linnea Kjeldgård, Therese Ljungquist, Gunnar H Nilsson, Kristina Alexanderson

Abstract

Physicians' work with sickness certifications is an understudied field. Physicians' experience of sickness certifying for longer periods than necessary has been previous reported. However, the extent and frequency of such sickness certification is largely unknown. The aims of this study were: a) to explore the frequency of sickness certifying for longer periods than necessary among physicians working in different clinical settings; b) to examine main reasons for issuing sickness certificates for longer periods than necessary; and c) to examine factors associated with unnecessary issued sickness certificates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 56%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 2 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2013.
All research outputs
#7,115,080
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,344
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,660
of 197,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#130
of 282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 282 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.